Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
SC determined the rights of a shipping line in a contempt proceeding, finding the impleadment of the appellant as a party was unlawful. The court set aside orders dated 17.02.2022, 04.03.2022, and 18.04.2022, which improperly adjudicated the appellant's rights in a contempt petition originally filed against customs department officers. The court held that determining the shipping line's rights in a contempt proceeding where it was not an original party was unwarranted and procedurally incorrect. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, nullifying the challenged orders and restoring the procedural status quo.
SC determined the rights of a shipping line in a contempt proceeding, finding the impleadment of the appellant as a party was unlawful. The court set aside orders dated 17.02.2022, 04.03.2022, and 18.04.2022, which improperly adjudicated the appellant's rights in a contempt petition originally filed against customs department officers. The court held that determining the shipping line's rights in a contempt proceeding where it was not an original party was unwarranted and procedurally incorrect. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, nullifying the challenged orders and restoring the procedural status quo.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
